Journal of Economics and Finance

, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp 422–434 | Cite as

Spatial distribution of the specialization of arts

Arts and Culture Symposium

Abstract

The hypothesis is that the major source of concentration of arts in different regions is due to agglomeration effects of specialized talents, city size, income, and quality of life. Twenty-nine large metropolitan areas are ranked and assessed for enhancing the climate for arts activity. Data on metropolitan areas in the United States on cost of living, transportation, employment, education, climate, crime, health care, recreation, city size, and per capita income are used as explanations for predominance of art in the 29 metropolitan areas. The results indicate that cities with larger populations and higher per capita income have greater concentrations of artistic activity. Other explanatory variables include factors associated with the quality of life. (JEL RIO, R23)

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, R., J.M. Quigley, and M. Wilhelmsson. 2005. “Agglomeration and the Spatial Distribution of Creativity.”Papers in Regional Science 84: 445–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angrist, J.D. and A.B. Krueger. 1991. “Does Compulsory School Attendance Affect Schooling and Earnings?Quarterly Journal of Economics 106: 979–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berry, C.R., and E.L. Glaeser. 2005. “The Divergence of Human Capital Levels across Cities.”Papers in Regional Science 84: 407–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blau, J.R. 1989.The Shape of Culture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Blomquist, G.C., M.C. Berger, and J. Hoehn. 1988. “New Estimates of Quality of Life in Urban Areas.”American Economic Review 78: 89–107.Google Scholar
  6. Bound, J., Jaeger, D.A., and R.M. Baker. 1995. “Problems with Instrumental Variables Estimation when the Correlation between the Instruments and the Endogenous Explanatory Variables is Weak.”Journal of the American Statistical Association 90: 443–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradford, N. 2007.Whither the Federal Urban Agenda? A New Deal in Transition, Canadian Policy Research Report F/65. Available at www.cprn.org.Google Scholar
  8. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2007. US Department of Commerce. Available at http://www.bea.gov/regional/reis/drill.fm.Google Scholar
  9. Burnell, J.D., and G. Galster. 1992. “Quality of Life Measurements and Urban Size: An Empirical Note.”Urban Studies 29: 727–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clark, D.E., and T.A. Knapp. 1995. “The Hedonic Price Structure of Faculty Compensations at U.S. Colleges and Universities.”The Review of Regional Studies 25: 117–142.Google Scholar
  11. Congdon, P., and J. Shepherd. 1988. “Components of Social Change in Urban Areas.”Urban Studies, 25: 173–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Creedy, J. 1985.Dynamics of Income Distribution. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell Ltd.Google Scholar
  13. Dougherty, C. 1992.Introduction to Econometrics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Ellis, M., R. Barff, and B. Renard. 1993. “Migration Regions and Interstate Labor Flows by Occupation in the United States.”Growth and Change 24: 166–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Florida, R. 2005. “The World is Spiky.”The Atlantic (October) 296: 48–51.Google Scholar
  16. Griffiths, A. and A.M. Williams. 1992. “Culture, Regional Image, and Economic Development in the United Kingdom,”World Futures 33: 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guetzkow, J. 2005.How the Arts Impact Communities: An Introduction to the Literature of Arts Impact Studies, Working Paper Series 20, http://www.princeton.edu/culturalpolicy/workpap/ WP20%20-%Guetzkow.pdf.Google Scholar
  18. Hu, T. 1973.Econometrics: An Introductory Analysis. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
  19. Johansson, B. and J.M. Quigley. 2004. “Agglomeration and Networks in Spatial Economies.”Papers in Regional Science 83: 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kosfeld, R. and C. Greger. 2006. “Thresholds for Employment and Unemployment: A Spatial Analysis of German Regional Labour Markets, 1992–2000.”Papers in Regional Science 85: 523–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kotkin, J. 2007. “The Myth of Superstar Cities.”The Wall Street Journal (Tuesday February 13): A-25.Google Scholar
  22. Kwoka, J.E., Jr. 1982. “Regularity and Diversity in Firm Size Distribution in U.S. Industries.”Journal of Economics and Business 34: 391–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lin, G. and C. Christiadi. 2006. “Examining the Geographic and Occupational Mobility: A Loglinear Modelling Approach.”Papers in Regional Science 85: 505–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lipshitz, G. and A. Raveh. 1994. “Application of the Co-Plot Method in the Study of SocioEconomic Differences between Cities: A Basis for a Differential Development Policy.”Urban Studies 31: 123–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Markusen, A. and D. King. 2003. “The Artistic Dividend: The Arts’ Hidden Contributions to Regional Development.” amarkusen@hhh.umn.edu July.Google Scholar
  26. Markusen, A., G. Schrock, and M. Cameron. 2004. “The Artistic Dividend Revisited.” amarkusen@hhh.umn.edu March.Google Scholar
  27. Mawson, J. 1995. “The Arts and Economic Development: Regional and Urban-Rural Contrasts in UK Local Authority Policies for the Arts.”Regional Studies 29: 73–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McCann, P. and J. Simonen. 2005. “Innovation, Knowledge Spillovers and Local Labour Markets.”Papers in Regional Science 84: 465–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Molotch, H. 2002. “Place in Products.”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 26: 665–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Molotch, H. 2003.Where Stuff Comes From. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Myerscough, J. 1989.The Economic Importance of the Arts in Britain. London, UK: Public Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  32. Rantisi, N.M. 2004. “The Ascendance of New York Fashion.”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 28: 86–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rey, S.J. and B. Dev. 2006. “σ-Convergence in the Presence of Spatial Effects.”Papers in Regional Science 85: 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roback, J. 1982. “Wages, Rents, and the Quality of Life.”Journal of Political Economy 90: 1257–1278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Savageau, D. and R. D’Agostino. 2000.Places Rated Almanac. Foster City, CA: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  36. Scott, A.J. 2000.The Cultural Economy of Cities: Essays on the Geography of Image-Producing Industries. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  37. Stewart, K.G. 2005.Introduction to Applied Econometrics. Belmont, CA: Thomson Learning, Inc.Google Scholar
  38. Stover, M.E. and C.L. Leven. 1992. “Methodological Issues in the Determination of the Quality of Life in Urban Areas.”Urban Studies 29: 737–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Theil, H. 1971.Principles of Econometrics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  40. Van Oort, F.G. 2007. “Spatial and Sectoral Composition Effects of Agglomeration Economies in the Netherlands.”Papers in Regional Science 86: 5–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Whitehouse, M. 2007. “Is an Economist Qualified to Solve Puzzle of Autism?: Dismal Science Spreads its Wings to New Fields, Attracting Criticism.”The Wall Street Journal (Tuesday, February 27): A1, A14.Google Scholar
  42. Wonnacott, R.J. and T.H. Wonnacott. 1970.Econometrics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of International BusinessUniversity of Southern MississippiHattiesburgUSA

Personalised recommendations